In support of barik's comment, I want to add that conference papers in computer science are peer reviewed, and the top conferences have an acceptance rate that is usually less than 15%. Simply, conference papers, rather than journal articles, is where most innovative computer science work goes. This is very true for systems, languages, software engineering, databases and HCI, but less so for the more theoretical areas.
Peer review doesn't necessarily mean anything objective unless it is totally doubly-blinded, which, ironically, is not used by many top system conferences.
This topic comes up when talking with researchers outside of computer science so often that the Computer Science Research Association wrote up a memo explaining it: http://cra.org/resources/bp-view/evaluating_computer_scienti...